Opinion
04-22-00880-CR
04-13-2023
EX PARTE Christopher-Jarvis PAYNE
Trial Court Case Number: 2021CR3349, 2022CR6932.
REBECA C. MARTINEZ, CHIEF JUSTICE, PATRICIA O. ALVAREZ, LUZ ELENA D. CHAPA, IRENE RIOS, BETH WATKINS, LIZA A. RODRIGUEZ, LORI I. VALENZUELA JUSTICES.
Enclosed please find the order which the Honorable Court of Appeals has issued in reference to the above styled and numbered cause.
If you should have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
This proceeding arises out of Cause Nos. 2021CR3349 and 2022CR6932, styled State of Texas v. Christopher Payne, pending in the 379th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas, the Honorable Ron Rangel presiding.
Sitting: Rebeca C. Martinez, Chief Justice (not participating), Liza A. Rodriguez, Justice Lori I. Valenzuela, Justice
The Honorable Luz Elena D. Chapa has recused from this proceeding for purposes of rehearing. Under rule 9.j of the Fourth Court of Appeals Internal Operating Procedures for the Handling of Cases, the Honorable Lori I. Valenzuela has been substituted.
ORDER
PER CURIAM
At the direction of Chief Justice Martinez, the Clerk of Court previously provided the parties with a disclosure of potential conflicts.
Additionally, the parties to the above cause are hereby notified that Chief Justice Rebeca C. Martinez, her spouse, or both, may have an interest in the following case(s):
Chief Justice Rebeca C. Martinez did not participate in this order.
1. Bexar County Cause No. 2022CI14132, David E. Martinez v. Universal Protection Service, LP, Mario Rios Pineda, Gracie Denise Segundo, and Patrick Clynes, pending in Bexar County District Court, which involves, at a minimum, attorneys and staff of the following:
A. Watts Guerra LLP;
B. Valdez & Trevino, PC; and
C. Oliva, Saks, Garcia & Curiel, PLLC.
2. Bexar County Cause No. 2022CR10214A, State of Texas v. Mario Rios Pineda, pending in the 187th Judicial District Court, Judge Stephanie Boyd presiding, which involves, at a minimum, the attorneys and staff of the following:
A. the Bexar County District Attorney's Office, and
B. Oliva, Saks, Garcia & Curiel, PLLC.
3. Bexar County Cause No. 2022CR10214B, State of Texas v. Gracie Denise Segundo, pending in the 187th Judicial District Court, Judge Stephanie Boyd presiding, which involves, at a minimum, the attorneys and staff of the following:
A. the Bexar County District Attorney's Office, and
B. Oliva, Saks, Garcia & Curiel, PLLC.
4. Bexar County Cause No. 693700, State of Texas v. Mario Rios Pineda, pending in Bexar County Court at Law No. 4, Judge Alfredo Ximenez presiding, which involves, at a minimum, the attorneys and staff of the following:
A. the Bexar County District Attorney's Office; and
B. Oliva, Saks, Garcia & Curiel, PLLC.
5. Bexar County Cause No. 693701, State of Texas v. Gracie Denise Segundo, pending in Bexar County Court at Law No. 5, Judge Andrea N. Arevalos presiding, which involves, at a minimum, the attorneys and staff of the following:
A. the Bexar County District Attorney's Office, and
B. Oliva, Saks, Garcia & Curiel, PLLC.
6. Bexar County Cause No. 693735, State of Texas v. Patrick Clynes, pending in Bexar County Court at Law No. 6, Judge Erica Dominguez presiding, which involves, at a minimum, the attorneys and staff of the following:
A. the Bexar County District Attorney's Office, and
B. Oliva, Saks, Garcia & Curiel, PLLC.
In conjunction with these cases, Chief Justice Martinez may have conflicts of interest, including with the following individuals and entities:
1. Mario Rios Pineda;
2. Gracie Denise Segundo;
3. Patrick Clynes;
4. attorneys and staff of Oliva, Saks, Garcia & Curiel, PLLC;
5. attorneys and staff of Valdez & Treviño, PC;
6. attorneys and staff of Watts Guerra LLP;
7. attorneys and staff of the Bexar County District Attorney's Office;
8. Universal Protection Service, LP;
9. the Honorable Stephanie Boyd;
10.the Honorable Alfredo Ximenez;
11.the Honorable Andrea N. Arevalos;
12.the Honorable Erica Dominguez;
13.the Honorable Mary Lou Alvarez;
14. any judge who has made or makes any ruling in the six above-named cases; and
15. any party to any appellate proceeding in this court where the above-named persons or entities are involved.
Chief Justice Martinez has not recused herself from this appeal. Because potential conflicts existed that she did not disclose to all parties to this appeal, and the other two panel members had no knowledge of these potential conflicts, we conclude good cause exists to extend the time period for filing a motion to recuse. See Tex. R. App. P. 2; In re J.N.L., 158 S.W.3d 527, 530 (Tex. App.-San Antonio 2004, no pet.) (en banc); see also Tex. R. App. P. 43.6 ("The court of appeals may make any other appropriate order that the law and the nature of the case require."). Any motion to recuse must be filed within sixty days of the date of this order. See Tex R App. P. 2, 16.3, 43.6.
For the same reasons, we conclude good cause exists to extend the time period for filing a motion for rehearing. See Tex. R App. P. 2; In re J.N.L., 158 S.W.3d at 530; see also Tex. R App. P. 43.6. On its own motion, the court grants an extension of time for any party to file a motion for rehearing in this cause within sixty days of the date of this order. See tex. R. App. P. 2, 19.1, 49.9.
It is so ORDERED.